China and America Are Failing the Pandemic Test

All national leaders must put their country’s interests first, but the important question is how broadly or narrowly they define those interests. Both China and the US are responding to COVID-19 with an inclination toward short-term, zero-sum approaches, and too little attention to international institutions and cooperation.

CAMBRIDGE – COVID-19 is confronting humanity with its most severe test since 1918, when an influenza pandemic killed more people than died in World War I. Yet the top leaders of the world’s two largest economies, China and the United States, have failed the first round.

The initial reaction of both Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump was denial. Crucial time for testing and containment was wasted, and opportunities for international cooperation were squandered.

Instead, after costly national lockdowns, the two leaders engaged in propaganda battles with each other. China’s foreign ministry blamed the US military for the emergence of the coronavirus in Wuhan, and Trump called it the “Chinese virus.” Yet COVID-19 does not care about the nationality of the humans it kills, and no global response will succeed without some degree of cooperation between the US and China.

Bilateral relations were already deteriorating rapidly when the virus hit. Trump’s 2017 National Security Strategy focused on great power competition with China. Many Americans of both major political parties agree that Trump was correct to punish China for cybertheft of intellectual property, coerced intellectual property transfer, and unfair trade practices such as subsidized credit to state-owned enterprises.

Reciprocity does need to be enforced. If China can ban Google and Facebook from its market for security reasons, the US can take similar steps against Huawei or ZTE. Anger and mistrust festers in both countries’ capitals.

But what the COVID-19 crisis teaches us is that this competitive approach to national security is inadequate. And COVID-19 is not the only example. The information revolution and globalization are changing world politics dramatically.

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world's leading thinkers, including weekly long reads, book reviews, and interviews; The Year Ahead annual print magazine; the complete PS archive; and more – all for less than $2 a week.

Subscribe Now

While trade wars have set back economic globalization, environmental globalization, reflected in pandemics and climate change, obeys the laws of biology and physics, not politics. In a world where borders are becoming more porous to everything from drugs and illicit financial flows to infectious diseases and cyber terrorism, countries must use their soft power of attraction to develop networks and institutions that address the new threats.

On transnational issues like COVID-19 and climate change, power becomes a positive-sum game. It is not enough to think of power over others; one must also consider power with others. On many transnational issues, empowering others helps a country accomplish its own goals. For example, all can benefit if others improve their energy efficiency, or improve their public health systems.

All leaders have a responsibility to put their country’s interests first, but the important moral question is how broadly or narrowly they choose to define those interests. Both China and the US are responding to COVID-19 with an inclination toward short-term, zero-sum, competitive approaches, and too little attention to international institutions and cooperation. As I show in my new book, Do Morals Matter?, Trump has interpreted “America First” too narrowly, stepping back from the long-term, enlightened self-interest that marked the post-1945 US approach designed by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and Dwight Eisenhower.

Cooperation is, however, possible between geopolitical and ideological rivals. For example, during the Cold War, the US and the Soviet Union both supported a United Nations program that eradicated smallpox. After the 2002-03 SARS epidemic, the US and China established a web of cooperative relations between national health authorities, and they worked together to combat the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa.

Attacks by new viruses can come in waves, and the second wave of the flu pandemic a century ago was more lethal than the first. There is much we do not know about the new coronavirus. There could be seasonal surges between the northern and southern hemispheres. When the Global North has a respite, the virus (or a mutation) may move south, and then spread northward again with the change in weather. In any case, we must be prepared for a multiyear battle, which will require sharing information, developing and producing therapies and vaccines, and manufacturing and distributing medical supplies and equipment.

The current COVID-19 crisis will continue to test US and Chinese leaders. To ensure they pass it, both sides should de-escalate the propaganda wars that sow mistrust and inhibit cooperation, and articulate the importance of “power with” rather than “over” others. They should plan for future waves of the coronavirus and establish bilateral and multilateral frameworks to enhance collaboration. And they should recognize that helping developing countries cope with COVID-19 is in everyone’s interest, because viral reservoirs anywhere will place people in jeopardy everywhere.

Both for self-interested and humanitarian reasons, the US and China should announce generous contributions to a major new UN coronavirus fund that is open to all countries. And they should jointly lead the G20 in funding it.

Lastly, given how much humans still must learn from each other about this new virus, the US and China should restore the rich web of contacts among scientists and medical professionals that existed a decade ago. It would also be wise to form a binational high-level commission on COVID-19, chaired by Vice President Mike Pence and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, to provide political cover and cut through bureaucratic red tape.

Chinese and American leaders botched the first round of their COVID-19 examination. But it is not too late for them to learn how to do better.

Support High-Quality Commentary

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

For the difficulties of this idea, see : https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/estimating-the-true-number-of-chinas-covid-19-cases/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWWpCaFpHSmhPVEkwWldRMSIsInQiOiJCNGNseXluYzA3TXpIcjlHUkM0QTJlenYwZTBXM0lpZjBKMjh5XC9aVzdcLzRENnRGaHpmOXlhcWdRaHIyS25qQlVPZjJWMTlNbGMrNjlTUzZCc01oOVdNQ1hVK0REdFp5RURNcmhaQWlVbWVBQSt3aGJRZkljS1dhXC8wS0J0N1VEaiJ9

Joseph S. Nye, Jr. claims both Chinese and American leaders had made their mistakes when COVID-19 began to spread earlier this year. While China’s leaders did fumble at the very start, yet in short order they acted far more decisively than many democratically elected leaders have to date. They imposed a dramatic lockdown in late January, while attitude in Europe had been reactive and largely passive. Trump initially denied the threat of a looming pandemic, worrying more about the stock markets than Americans’ wellbeing. Since then Europe and the US have been convulsed by the rapid spread of the coronavirus in many regions. As the world grapples with the human and economic devastation being wrought by the pandemic, the US and China must put aside their global competition and rising tensions that impede efforts to fight the pandemic. Although the relationship between China and the US had reached a new nadir since Trump imposed tariffs and trade barriers on China in 2018, the author says it is still “not too late for them to learn how to do better.” The current health crisis poses a global threat to our collective humanity, as the number of COVID-19 infections and grim death tolls keep on rising in the US and around the world – with no end in sight. As China and the US are not being spared, the two countries and the rest of the world must focus on fighting the pandemic, instead of trading barbs with and slinging mud at one another. Unfortunately this blame game has undermined diplomacy. Trump, Mike Pompeo and other officials have called Covid-19 the “Chinese virus” and the Republican senator Tom Cotton hinted (without evidence) that the virus could be a bioweapon created by China. Yet the Chinese Communist Party’s propaganda machine has been promoting conspiracy theories, suggesting that the US military might have brought the coronavirus to the city of Wuhan, which has been hard hit by COVID-19. The author says the pandemic “does not care about the nationality of the humans it kills, and no global response will succeed without some degree of cooperation between the US and China.” It is imperative that both sides tone down aspects of their rivalry and competition temporarily. Trump’s 2017 National Security Strategy “focused on great power competition with China.” While the US should ignore the China’s initial response to the virus, it should not turn a blind eye to China’s behaviour. “Many Americans of both major political parties agree that Trump was correct to punish China for cybertheft of intellectual property, coerced intellectual property transfer, and unfair trade practices such as subsidized credit to state-owned enterprises. Reciprocity does need to be enforced. If China can ban Google and Facebook from its market for security reasons, the US can take similar steps against Huawei or ZTE. Anger and mistrust festers in both countries’ capitals.” Now, it is important for both sides to take concrete steps to ensure that the competition does not inhibit the fight against the pandemic, because such a “competitive approach to national security is inadequate. And COVID-19 is not the only example. The information revolution and globalization are changing world politics dramatically.” What the current crisis teaches us is that “while trade wars have set back economic globalization, environmental globalization, reflected in pandemics and climate change, obeys the laws of biology and physics, not politics.”We are living in a world where borders have become “porous” to everything that nothing can be kept outside – drugs, cyber terrorism, infectious diseases etc. Countries must therefore “use their soft power of attraction to develop networks and institutions that address the new threats,” instead of building walls and closing borders. The author says on global issues like pandemic and climate change, “power becomes a positive-sum game. It is not enough to think of power over others; one must also consider power with others.”Trump and president Xi Jinping held a phone call about the coronavirus outbreak in an attempt to repair strained relations, following weeks of tensions. Xi told Trump that US-China relations had reached an “important juncture.” He said working together would bring mutual benefits, while fighting hurt both. Although Trump might consider cooperation being a good choice in this election year, in an effort to prevent the US economy from tanking, it remains to be seen whether the “substantive actions” that Xi proposed are enough to rebuild trust. The author says both China and the US “are responding to COVID-19 with an inclination toward short-term, zero-sum approaches, and too little attention to international institutions and cooperation.” Indeed, such a cooperation may not be sustainable and would hardly improve the bilateral relations and develop a relationship “without conflict and confrontation” but based on “mutual respect and mutually beneficial cooperation." Power competition is inevitable. As long as the two countries can live alongside each other without dragging the whole world down, they are doing us a huge favour.

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

New Comment

It appears that you have not yet updated your first and last name. If you would like to update your name, please do so here.

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Mass protests over racial injustice, the COVID-19 pandemic, and a sharp economic downturn have plunged the United States into its deepest crisis in decades. Will the public embrace radical, systemic reforms, or will the specter of civil disorder provoke a conservative backlash?

For democratic countries like the United States, the COVID-19 crisis has opened up four possible political and socioeconomic trajectories. But only one path forward leads to a destination that most people would want to reach.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.